|
|
Posted by Tony Marston on 12/01/06 09:56
"Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:rNidnZrE3O5fSvPYnZ2dnUVZ_vednZ2d@comcast.com...
> Tony Marston wrote:
< snip>
>>>>>Tony and I have been into this before. He breaks into conversations
>>>>>trying to spout his version of OO, with a few blogs from people no one
>>>>>every heard of to back him up.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I see. So in your opinion Martin Fowler is of of these "people no one
>>>>ever heard of "? He says, like I do, that "Encapsulation Wasn't Meant To
>>>>Mean Data Hiding" at http://homepage.mac.com/keithray/blog/2006/02/22/
>>>>
>>>>Are you saying that YOU are more of an expert than Martin Fowler? What
>>>>arrogance!
>>>>
>>>
>>>No, I'm saying Booch, Rumbaugh and Jacobson, among others, are more
>>>expert than Martin Fowler. And yes, I've heard of him.
>>>
>>>But you're not quoting Martin Fowler. You're quoting Keith Ray's
>>>INTERPRETATION if Martin Fowler.
>>
>>
>> If you bothered to follow the link to Martn Fowler's page at
>> http://martinfowler.com/bliki/GetterEradicator.html you would see in
>> paragraph 4 tha it is a direct quotation, not an interpretation.
>>
>
> Yes, and did you actually read that page? To quote from Martin Fowler:
>
> "For me, the point of encapsulation isn't really about hiding the data,
> but in hiding design decisions, particularly in areas where those
> decisions may have to change. The internal data representation is one
> example of this..."
The full quote is "The internal data representation is one example of this,
** but not the only one and not always the best one.**" The significant
point is the sentence which reads "point of encapsulation isn't really about
hiding the data, but in hiding design decisions". If you follow the link he
provides to
http://www.craiglarman.com/articles/The%20Importance%20of%20Being%20Closed%20-%20Larman%20-%20IEEE%20Software.pdf
by Craig Larman there is an interesting chapter with the title "Information
hiding is PV, not data encapsulation". The hiding of design decisions was
supposed to mean hiding the code which manipulates the data, not the data
itself.
As I have said several times, and quoted from other resources, encapsulation
is NOT about INFORMATION hiding but about IMPLEMENTATION hiding. There is a
subtle difference which you fail to grasp.
> This is in perfect agreement with Booch, Rumbaugh, Iverson and others. And
> a direct CONTRADICTION to troll Tony Marston.
>
>>
>>>>>It's not worth getting into the argument. He's just a troll with
>>>>>delusions of competency.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>If everyone who disagrees with you is incompetent then the world is full
>>>>of idiots. Your opinion is not the only opinion, and there are plenty of
>>>>"experts" who have opposing views.
>>>>
>>>
>>>No, I disagree with a lot of competent people. It's YOU who are an
>>>incompetent troll. And you continue to prove it.
>>>
>>>Try these - with direct quotes from recognized experts, and examples:
>>>
>>>http://www.research.umbc.edu/~tarr/dp/lectures/OOPrinciples-2pp.pdf
>>>http://www.nnwj.de/encapsulation.html
>>>
>>>Or better yet, read the real books by these authors.
>>>
>>>But I know you won't, because you disagree with what they say, and don't
>>>want to burst your little bubble.
>>>
>>>Troll.
>>
>>
>> Whether you like it or not there is no such thing as a single opinion as
>> to what OOP is and is not, and there are multiple interpretations as to
>> the real meaning of encapsulation, inheritance, polymorphism,
>> implementation hiding and information hiding. Just because you quote
>> sources who agree with you does not mean you are right and everybody else
>> is wrong. Here are sources with the opinion that "Encapsulation is NOT
>> information hiding":
>>
>> http://homepage.mac.com/keithray/blog/2006/02/22/
>> http://martinfowler.com/bliki/GetterEradicator.html
>> http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/jw-05-2001/jw-0518-encapsulation.html?page=1
>> http://www.itmweb.com/essay550.htm
>> http://nat.truemesh.com/archives/000498.html
>>
>> The world is full of different opinions, so who is to say which ones are
>> right and which ones are wrong?
>>
>
> Yea, and some, like yours, troll, are just wrong.
In your opinion they are wrong, but I do not value your opinion.
> Read the experts I've mentioned several times. You might actually learn
> something.
>
> But I know you won't. Like all trolls you know everything and anyone who
> disagrees with you is wrong - no matter how much of a recognized expert he
> is.
All the "experts" in the world do not agree. "My" experts disagree with
"your" experts. Just because I, and many others, disagree with your opinion
does not make me/us wrong.
> Go and crawl back into your hole, troll. And take your delusions of
> competence with you.
Typical reaction of a moron. When you start losing the argument out come the
insults.
--
Tony Marston
http://www.tonymarston.net
http://www.radicore.org
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|